Re: pg_extension_config_dump() with a sequence

Thank you very much, Tom. That was it. Our other server is running 9.1.9
and that's why it worked there.

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:50 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Moshe Jacobson <moshe(at)neadwerx(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Well, I think you did it wrong, or else you're using a PG version that
> >> predates some necessary fix, because it works for me.
>
> > Sorry for the delayed response. I am using postgres 9.1.4 with pg_dump of
> > the same version.
>
> Ah. I think that you are missing this 9.1.7 fix:
>
> commit 5110a96992e508b220a7a6ab303b0501c4237b4a
> Author: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Date: Fri Oct 26 12:12:53 2012 -0400
>
> In pg_dump, dump SEQUENCE SET items in the data not pre-data section.
>
> Represent a sequence's current value as a separate TableDataInfo
> dumpable
> object, so that it can be dumped within the data section of the archive
> rather than in pre-data. This fixes an undesirable inconsistency
> between
> the meanings of "--data-only" and "--section=data", and also fixes
> dumping
> of sequences that are marked as extension configuration tables, as per
> a
> report from Marko Kreen back in July. The main cost is that we do one
> more
> SQL query per sequence, but that's probably not very meaningful in most
> databases.
>
> Back-patch to 9.1, since it has the extension configuration issue even
> though not the --section switch.
>
>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Moshe Jacobson
Nead Werx, Inc. | Manager of Systems Engineering
2323 Cumberland Parkway, Suite 201 | Atlanta, GA 30339
moshe(at)neadwerx(dot)com | www.neadwerx.com

"Quality is not an act, it is a habit." -- Aristotle